memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Memory Alpha:Pages for deletion/Space shuttle missions
This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete " ". *If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale". *If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion". *If a consensus has been reached, an administrator will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution". In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page. Deletion rationale This page is unnecessary and we should link to wikipedia on the actual patch pages rather than create a page to add more non-canon realworld information. — Morder (talk) 08:41, November 21, 2009 (UTC) Discussion *The page dose seem rather pointless since it keeps telling you to go to Wikipedia anyways, though it seems that the relevant content should be merged with space shuttle orbiter. - Archduk3:talk 08:53, November 21, 2009 (UTC) *'Delete'. We kinda had this discussion with the creator of that article (Airtram3), who tended to create articles like this one(such as the numerous geographic features supposedly seen in , all based on dubious "appearance" in the episode which he called "soft canon". Unless someone can produce evidence that these mission patches were clearly seen in the episode(in which case they could be merged with space shuttle) or evidence that they were used on the set(in which case they could be categorized as unreferenced material and rewritten) then this should be deleted.--31dot 11:26, November 21, 2009 (UTC) :They were noted as used by John Eaves and has several photos of them on his website I'll post the link later. — Morder (talk) 23:47, November 21, 2009 (UTC) ::Morder, do you have that link? It's later. :) Either way it looks like we could downgrade this to a merge suggestion since it looks like there might be a place for these things.--31dot 22:07, January 24, 2010 (UTC) *The probe Voyager was seen in the first Star Trek movie, it coming to life and causing problems, and it also a plot element in the comic book series set to happen before the most recent Star Trek movie. I also recall there one Star Trek movie where a Human satellite was floating into Klingon territory, and they fired upon it, destroying the old Human junk. And it list the one that had actual footage seen in the opening sequence of Star Trek Enterprise. Not every shuttle ever launched has affected the Star Trek universe, but those who did, or were seen at all, should be mentioned. Trim, don't delete. Perhaps just have a link to the Wikipedia article listing all shuttles, if anyone wants additional information about them. [[User:Dream Focus | Dream Focus]] 04:54, March 6, 2010 (UTC) :::Based on the Morder had, which shows the patches use in the 602 Club, I think that this page's info should be broken down into articles for the named crewmembers on the NASA patches used, which include more than just the space shuttle ones. We already have one article based on that, and the rest of the info could go on the pages for the 602 Club and NASA. If unreadable in-jokes like Kermit T. Frog and Miss Piggy get their own articles, I don't see why these people wouldn't. Of course, the mission numbers, shuttle names, even if it was a shuttle mission, in most cases would be bg info only. - 08:49, July 19, 2010 (UTC) ::::No, I don't think we should. The only thing we have is a production source that says what the patches were. These names are not visible and are only implied. This is basically the same discussion we had here. Anyway, I think we already deleted all the articles for these astronauts anyway under similar circumstances. — Morder (talk) 13:34, July 19, 2010 (UTC) :::I don't think this falls under the same thing as "The Cage" map, since we have a production source showing that they are what we think they are, and were put there on purpose, unlike the map, not to mention in some cases they are (Trekcore link, either go there first and then open or copy & paste). Also, we do have plenty of articles for things that are completely unreadable on screen and only confirmed from a bg source. Yes, technically the first names are implied, but since we know that they are there as a deliberate reference, I think we would be safe adding the first name to a page under the same reasoning that we use for other things (Maximilian Forrest); and if not, then we still have the last names to use as completely valid title, since they were seen onscreen. - 14:12, July 19, 2010 (UTC) ::::It does fall under the cage map as it's the same situation. We have a source that was chosen by production to appear in a show. That source is unreadable but we know what the source is of. Technically, I could say that all the shuttle patches shown in the 602 club have different people listed on them because we know that Star Trek history does not follow our own history. Yes, it was chosen on purpose and those that are readable should get an article. But to start adding articles simply because a production source exists doesn't make it canon except in certain situations such as the name of an article. Production sources are background material only, as stated in our policies. — Morder (talk) 23:06, July 19, 2010 (UTC) ::::I've created this edit that takes care of the information for the 602 club specifically. — Morder (talk) 23:16, July 19, 2010 (UTC) :::Depending how this goes, I think the policy should be clarified to exempt real-world references, as this would seem to fall under the current : "Visual material can be supplemented by clearer visual images of the identical material seen (for example, production art identifiable as being the same as shown on screen in an episode but more legible than what is shown on screen)". Clearly there is an unwritten double standard. While I agree with Alan's reasoning for not have loads of articles for cities seen on "The Cage" map, I believe these patches, including the names, are at the very least, of "trivial interest". :::As for the 602 edit, I don't have a clear source to check what was actually seen on screen, but there are far more than just Apollo 8 there. Also, I would assume that Apollo missions should be added to this discussion, for much of the same reasons. - 00:08, July 20, 2010 (UTC) ::::There is only one I can't identify. Though I'll ask over the weekend someone who would know. (Note, in case I missed it I only looked at one image. I also disagree with your policy change proposal in that the current one works and there's no need to have a policy change just to make a couple articles that will be nothing but stubs anyway. Background notes are sufficient. — Morder (talk) 02:07, July 20, 2010 (UTC) I agree with Archduk3, this info would be best presented as part of the Space Shuttle article rather than have it's own page, it would be a lot more concise. Starfleet Section 31 05:18, December 26, 2010 (UTC) Admin resolution *'Keep'. There doesn't seem to be a firm consensus for deleting this, and with no comment since December, and first nominated in 2009, it's time to wrap this up.--31dot 15:41, March 16, 2011 (UTC)